ReviewEuropean heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging2025
Myocardial remodelling in aortic regurgitation: time to think beyond volumes and function?
Review in European heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ankle-brachial index and brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity as markers of severe aortic regurgitation: a hospital-based cohort study.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2026Article
- Myocardial remodeling in valvular heart disease: pathophysiology, multimodality imaging and treatment implications.Heart failure reviews · 2026Review
- Contemporary Overview of Aortic Regurgitation in Young Individuals: Insights From Real-Life Evidence.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Review
- Asymptomatic Aortic Regurgitation: Evolving Imaging Markers and Contemporary Intervention Strategies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Current guideline criteria for surgical intervention in chronic aortic regurgitation (AR) rely on fixed thresholds of left ventricular size and ejection fraction, but these metrics may overlook early myocardial injury and under-appreciate patient heterogeneity, particularly in women and older adults. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) offers robust quantification of regurgitant volume, three-dimensional ventricular volumes, and both focal (late gadolinium enhancement) and diffuse (T1-mapping-derived extracellular volume) fibrosis. Observational studies have linked CMR-detected fibrosis to worse clinical outcomes and less favourable reverse remodelling after valve intervention, suggesting that fibrosis may mark the transition from compensated overload to irreversible myocardial damage. In this narrative review, we appraise the limitations of current guidelines, compare echocardiographic and CMR approaches to AR assessment, and summarize the evidence supporting myocardial fibrosis as a potential imaging biomarker for risk stratification. We discuss how integrating CMR-derived fibrosis metrics with volumetric and functional data could personalize timing of aortic valve intervention. While prospective studies are needed to validate fibrosis-guided decision-making, this evolving paradigm holds promise for earlier identification of patients at risk for irreversible myocardial injury, with the ultimate goal of preserving ventricular function and improving long-term outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.